• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 MQs in their L1 or 프라그마틱 순위 L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.